[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b5d83fcd-09fb-4680-a594-d4848fddc50a@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 14:42:43 +0100
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com,
vschneid@...hat.com, corbet@....net, alexs@...nel.org,
siyanteng@...ngson.cn, qyousef@...alina.io,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: lukasz.luba@....com, hongyan.xia2@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Simplify util_est
On 27/11/2023 15:32, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> With UTIL_EST_FASTUP now being permanent, we can take advantage of the
> fact that the ewma jumps directly to a higher utilization at dequeue to
> simplify util_est and remove the enqueued field.
>
Did some simple test with a ramp-up/ramp_down (10-80-10%) task affine to
a CPU.
https://nbviewer.org/github/deggeman/lisa/blob/ipynbs/ipynb/scratchpad/util_est_fastup.ipynb
LGTM.
[...]
> @@ -4879,27 +4865,22 @@ static inline void util_est_update(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
> * Skip update of task's estimated utilization when its members are
> * already ~1% close to its last activation value.
> */
> - last_ewma_diff = ue.enqueued - ue.ewma;
> - last_enqueued_diff -= ue.enqueued;
> - if (within_margin(last_ewma_diff, UTIL_EST_MARGIN)) {
> - if (!within_margin(last_enqueued_diff, UTIL_EST_MARGIN))
> - goto done;
> -
> - return;
> - }
> + last_ewma_diff = ewma - dequeued;
> + if (last_ewma_diff < UTIL_EST_MARGIN)
> + goto done;
>
> /*
> * To avoid overestimation of actual task utilization, skip updates if
> * we cannot grant there is idle time in this CPU.
> */
> - if (task_util(p) > arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu_of(rq_of(cfs_rq))))
> + if (dequeued > arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu_of(rq_of(cfs_rq))))
> return;
Not directly related to the changes: Should we not use `goto done` here
is well to rearm UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED?
> /*
> * To avoid underestimate of task utilization, skip updates of EWMA if
> * we cannot grant that thread got all CPU time it wanted.
> */
> - if ((ue.enqueued + UTIL_EST_MARGIN) < task_runnable(p))
> + if ((dequeued + UTIL_EST_MARGIN) < task_runnable(p))
> goto done;
>
>
> @@ -4914,18 +4895,18 @@ static inline void util_est_update(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
> * ewma(t) = w * task_util(p) + (1-w) * ewma(t-1)
> * = w * task_util(p) + ewma(t-1) - w * ewma(t-1)
> * = w * (task_util(p) - ewma(t-1)) + ewma(t-1)
> - * = w * ( last_ewma_diff ) + ewma(t-1)
> - * = w * (last_ewma_diff + ewma(t-1) / w)
> + * = w * ( -last_ewma_diff ) + ewma(t-1)
> + * = w * (-last_ewma_diff + ewma(t-1) / w)
> *
> * Where 'w' is the weight of new samples, which is configured to be
> * 0.25, thus making w=1/4 ( >>= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT)
> */
The text above still mentioned ue.enqueued and that we store the current
PELT value ... which isn't the case anymore.
> - ue.ewma <<= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT;
> - ue.ewma += last_ewma_diff;
> - ue.ewma >>= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT;
> + ewma <<= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT;
> + ewma -= last_ewma_diff;
> + ewma >>= UTIL_EST_WEIGHT_SHIFT;
> done:
> - ue.enqueued |= UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED;
> - WRITE_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est, ue);
> + ewma |= UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED;
> + WRITE_ONCE(p->se.avg.util_est, ewma);
>
> trace_sched_util_est_se_tp(&p->se);
> }
[...]
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists